Evolution fact or fiction?
- Thread starter tooldtocare
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Why is it that people in the church trust in the words of man over the words of God?
Science itself does not disprove Creation, in fact, direct application of science helps to show that God's account of history is real.
We can look at the flood and see through rapid deposition of sediments, that layers of rock can be laid down rather quickly. Mt St Helen's eruption shows us that multiple layers of sediment can be laid down in a matter of hours to days. Water is also rather powerful. With a global flood, it could easily carve canyons in a short period of time.
Why is it that of the 2301 time Yom is used as a day in the OT... the only time we have a problem understanding that it means a normal day is in Genesis 1? Creation is a foundational principle of our faith. What shall we then decide to interpret for ourselves? Christ's death and resurrection?
Proverbs 30:5-6 NKJV
5 Every word of God is pure;
He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.
6 Do not add to His words,
Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.
Job 38:1-18 NKJV
38 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:
2 “Who is this who darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 Now prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me.
4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors,
When it burst forth and issued from the womb;
9 When I made the clouds its garment,
And thick darkness its swaddling band;
10 When I fixed My limit for it,
And set bars and doors;
11 When I said,
‘This far you may come, but no farther,
And here your proud waves must stop!’
12 “Have you commanded the morning since your days began,
And caused the dawn to know its place,
13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth,
And the wicked be shaken out of it?
14 It takes on form like clay under a seal,
And stands out like a garment.
15 From the wicked their light is withheld,
And the upraised arm is broken.
16 “Have you entered the springs of the sea?
Or have you walked in search of the depths?
17 Have the gates of death been revealed to you?
Or have you seen the doors of the shadow of death?
18 Have you comprehended the breadth of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
Science itself does not disprove Creation, in fact, direct application of science helps to show that God's account of history is real.
We can look at the flood and see through rapid deposition of sediments, that layers of rock can be laid down rather quickly. Mt St Helen's eruption shows us that multiple layers of sediment can be laid down in a matter of hours to days. Water is also rather powerful. With a global flood, it could easily carve canyons in a short period of time.
Why is it that of the 2301 time Yom is used as a day in the OT... the only time we have a problem understanding that it means a normal day is in Genesis 1? Creation is a foundational principle of our faith. What shall we then decide to interpret for ourselves? Christ's death and resurrection?
Proverbs 30:5-6 NKJV
5 Every word of God is pure;
He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him.
6 Do not add to His words,
Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.
Job 38:1-18 NKJV
38 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:
2 “Who is this who darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 Now prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me.
4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8 “Or who shut in the sea with doors,
When it burst forth and issued from the womb;
9 When I made the clouds its garment,
And thick darkness its swaddling band;
10 When I fixed My limit for it,
And set bars and doors;
11 When I said,
‘This far you may come, but no farther,
And here your proud waves must stop!’
12 “Have you commanded the morning since your days began,
And caused the dawn to know its place,
13 That it might take hold of the ends of the earth,
And the wicked be shaken out of it?
14 It takes on form like clay under a seal,
And stands out like a garment.
15 From the wicked their light is withheld,
And the upraised arm is broken.
16 “Have you entered the springs of the sea?
Or have you walked in search of the depths?
17 Have the gates of death been revealed to you?
Or have you seen the doors of the shadow of death?
18 Have you comprehended the breadth of the earth?
Tell Me, if you know all this.
Last edited:
M
Hi. I think Evolution fiction. Hahaha. Actually, the Pope whatever he said.............. I find it difficult to support the Christian Faith or any other religion or faith when you go the way of Evolution. It collapses any other belief. There cannot be two contradictory truths. It's either one or the other. Actually I am drawn to this forum /thread because yesterday someone questioned me on whether I believe in Evolution or "the bible stories"...... I tried to maintain my cool at first but this guy made some preety explosive and offensive statements that I won't repeat here or anywhere. I was offended but bit my tongue and from around 6pm to 2am we went back and forth.
The “missing link” is the holy grail of evolutionists. If scientists can find
the remains of a “transition” species, they will definitively prove evolution,
the thinking goes. - Now, that missing link has been found!
That is, if we are to believe recent reports.
A Multimillion-Dollar Monkey Fraud
https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/6223.3.0.0/society/media/a-multimillion-dollar-monkey-fraud
At the end of May,2009 mass media started hyperventilating over the discovery
of Ida, a fossilized monkey skeleton hailed as the “missing link” in human evolution.
Fox News said the fossil “made waves” among scientists and non-scientists alike.
Scientists: 'Missing Link' Fossil Not Worth Media Hype | Fox News
The Guardian called it “one of the most significant primate fossil finds ever made.”
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/may/19/fossil-ida-missing-link
Google made the fossil image a part of its homepage logo.
The Wall Street Journal dubbed Ida a possible “landmark discovery”
—potentially a common ancestor of all later monkeys, apes—and humans.
Fossil Discovery Is Heralded - WSJ
Yes, the media went bananas over the fossilized remains that scientists claim
closely resemble a lemur (a small, tree-dwelling primate found in Madagascar)
in some respects but an ape in others. Some experts called the skeleton
the “eighth wonder of the world.” Others said the impact upon paleontology
would be comparable to an “asteroid falling down to Earth.”
At one point, the euphoria was so intense that the discovery was compared
to the moon landing and the Kennedy assassination.
The Missing Link ... to a Bigger Audience? - The New York Times
Even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg got carried away at the star-studded
unveiling, calling the preserved specimen an “astonishing breakthrough.”
Amid Media Circus, Scientists Doubt 'Ida' Is Your Ancestor
We haven’t seen science hype like this since the Mars rock.
But before you take the scientists’ and the media’s word for it and hang portraits
of apes over the family fireplace, you might want to look a little closer.
Sorry evolutionists: For all the big headlines and grand proclamations,
this “missing link” is another—if beautifully preserved—fraud,
another in a long line of distinguished frauds.
The fanfare surrounding Ida is reminiscent of another famous fossil:
the Piltdown man. Perhaps you have heard of it? The Piltdown fossil
was a series of skull fragments discovered in the early 1900s that
encompassed a human-like skull, orangutan-like jaw, and chimpanzee
-like teeth. Scientists gave it the name Eoanthropus dawsoni.
A familiar degree of great excitement accompanied the discovery of
this fossil, as it purported to demonstrate a transition species between
man and “lower primates.” The great majority of the scientific community
jumped on this discovery as proof of evolution and the fossilized missing
links that even Charles Darwin was admittedly at a loss to explain.
Over 500 essays and scientific papers were written on the subject. Graduate
students produced their doctoral theses from studying the fragments.
There was only one problem: The fantastic find was a fake.
The perpetrator combined a 700-year-old human skull, a 500-year-old
lower jaw of a Sarawak orangutan and fossilized chimpanzee teeth.
He then used chemicals to dye the bones to give the appearance of age.
But here is the point. It took approximately 40 years for the scientific
community to discover the difference between a supposed multimillion
-year-old fossil and a modern chimpanzee.
For four decades, the majority of the scientific community accepted the
fossil as legitimate fact and proof that modern man was just part of
an evolutionary chain of species—despite the fact that several credible
scientists almost immediately disputed the validity of the find, that there
were visible file markings detectable on the teeth, and other incongruities.
Textbooks incorporated the discovery, thousands of students were taught
the faulty information, and untold millions were unsuspectingly influenced
into accepting the belief that people had evolved from monkeys.
All from a cobbled-together mess of human, orangutan and chimpanzee parts.
It was not just because of shoddy “scientific” testing applied to it that
the Piltdown hoax worked (although an unbiased and careful examination,
using the tools available at the time, would have revealed the hoax),
but because the fake fossil neatly satisfied the prevailing preconceived theory
of the time. Thus, supposedly unbiased truth-seeking scientists easily and even
willingly overlooked the aspects of the discovery that argued against its validity.
This is the pitfall that evolutionary enthusiasts repeatedly fall into.
Despite more than 150 years of searching for bones, the fossil record continues
to disprove the evolutionary theory. Not a single confirmed transition fossil
has been found! According to the evolutionary theory, there should be millions
and billions. Animals have been evolving into new species for hundreds of
millions of years, the theory goes. Therefore, scientists have reasonably
expected to find thousands of fossils, or at least hundreds, or maybe 10
transitionary species. But they can’t find a single one!
Scientists are not trying to honestly prove whether evolution holds true, as they
would any other theory. They are desperately, one-sidedly trying to verify evolution.
That is why the supposed Ida discovery (Darwinius masillae) is such a big deal.
“It’s part of our evolution that’s been hidden so far, it’s been hidden because
all the other specimens are so incomplete,” says Prof. Jorn Hurum, the scientist
who bought the fossil from a private collector who obtained it many years prior.
“They are so broken there’s almost nothing to study, and now this wonderful
fossil appears, and it makes the story so much easier to tell, so it’s really a
dream come true” (emphasis mine throughout).
“The significance of this new find is it has almost every single fragment
of bones,” confirms Tab Rasmussen, an anthropologist at Washington
University in St. Louis. “It’s very difficult to find anything besides teeth,
a jaw, and bones here and there. This is something that really vaults
the whole field forward.”
According to revealingthelink.com, the official website promoting Ida,
there is no primate fossil “so well preserved until we get to human burial.”
Revealing the Link - Welcome
Revealing the Link - The Implications - What Ida Tells Us
How condemning. The notion of evolution, accepted by the mainstream scientific
community as fact, is largely based on nothing more than a few eroded bone
fragments or scattered teeth—garbage evidence. And these are scientists;
individuals who supposedly reject anything but the hard, cold facts.
Evolution, it seems, is a theory based upon the evidence of things not seen.
But what about Ida? It is 95 percent complete, and even the contents of its last
dinner are visibly preserved in the fossil. Surely, all the hype must indicate
that it is good proof of evolution.
Unfortunately for evolutionists, as it turns out, Ida is a fraud too.
Professor Hurum and the professors at the University of Oslo purchased
the Ida fossil from a private collector who had purchased the fossil from
other black market dealers who had purchased it from amateur fossil
hunters in 1983. But even disregarding the atrocious second- and third-hand
chain of custody that would typically invalidate normal scientific procedure,
other evidence has come to light.
One of the co-authors who released the Ida study, Dr. Philip Gingerich,
recently admitted that the team would have preferred to publish in a
rigorous scientific journal, but had to settle for an open-source journal.
He told the Wall Street Journal, “There was a tv company involved and time
pressure. We’ve been pushed to finish the study. It’s not how I like to do science.”
And then, to even be allowed to publish their ideas in the less-rigorous,
free online Public Library of Science One journal, the scientists had to
virtually renounce their own claim that Ida was a human ancestor by
inserting the statement: “[The species] could represent a stem group
from which later anthropoid primates evolved [the line leading to humans],
but we are not advocating this here.”
Wow! So, outside of the History Channel (which spent a record amount to
purchase the Ida movie rights months ago), the book promotion, and the
high-profile Michael Bloomberg press conference, Ida as a “missing link”
isn’t even considered good science.
It rings “all sorts of warning bells” when a tv company is dictating the science,
notes Prof. Peter Brown, a paleoanthropologist at the University of New England.
He says the scientific study did not provide sufficient proof to consider Ida as
a human ancestor, or even a primate ancestor. “It’s nice it has fingernails,
something we have, as do most primates … but they’ve cherry-picked
particular character[istics], and they’ve been criticized [by other scientists]
for doing that.”
“It’s not a missing link, it’s not even a terribly close relative to monkeys,
apes and humans, which is the point they’re trying to make,” says Carnegie
Museum of Natural History curator of vertebrate paleontology Chris Beard.
“I would be absolutely dumbfounded if it turns out to be a potential ancestor to humans.”
Even the scientists—in fact, the majority of scientists according to Yale
University’s Chris Gilbert—don’t believe the Ida fossil is a missing link.
Amid Media Circus, Scientists Doubt 'Ida' Is Your Ancestor
A Multimillion-Dollar Monkey Fraud
So where does that leave us?
It leaves us with monkey bones. Very beautiful, very complete fossilized
monkey bones, but monkey bones nonetheless. Ida is nothing more than
an extinct species of lemur. It’s not the “astounding” “landmark discovery”
it was hailed to be.
But this episode does uncover a real discovery: Just how willing “scientists”
are to close their eyes to the scientific truth. ?
the remains of a “transition” species, they will definitively prove evolution,
the thinking goes. - Now, that missing link has been found!
That is, if we are to believe recent reports.
A Multimillion-Dollar Monkey Fraud
https://www.thetrumpet.com/article/6223.3.0.0/society/media/a-multimillion-dollar-monkey-fraud
At the end of May,2009 mass media started hyperventilating over the discovery
of Ida, a fossilized monkey skeleton hailed as the “missing link” in human evolution.
Fox News said the fossil “made waves” among scientists and non-scientists alike.
Scientists: 'Missing Link' Fossil Not Worth Media Hype | Fox News
The Guardian called it “one of the most significant primate fossil finds ever made.”
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/may/19/fossil-ida-missing-link
Google made the fossil image a part of its homepage logo.
The Wall Street Journal dubbed Ida a possible “landmark discovery”
—potentially a common ancestor of all later monkeys, apes—and humans.
Fossil Discovery Is Heralded - WSJ
Yes, the media went bananas over the fossilized remains that scientists claim
closely resemble a lemur (a small, tree-dwelling primate found in Madagascar)
in some respects but an ape in others. Some experts called the skeleton
the “eighth wonder of the world.” Others said the impact upon paleontology
would be comparable to an “asteroid falling down to Earth.”
At one point, the euphoria was so intense that the discovery was compared
to the moon landing and the Kennedy assassination.
The Missing Link ... to a Bigger Audience? - The New York Times
Even New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg got carried away at the star-studded
unveiling, calling the preserved specimen an “astonishing breakthrough.”
Amid Media Circus, Scientists Doubt 'Ida' Is Your Ancestor
We haven’t seen science hype like this since the Mars rock.
But before you take the scientists’ and the media’s word for it and hang portraits
of apes over the family fireplace, you might want to look a little closer.
Sorry evolutionists: For all the big headlines and grand proclamations,
this “missing link” is another—if beautifully preserved—fraud,
another in a long line of distinguished frauds.
The fanfare surrounding Ida is reminiscent of another famous fossil:
the Piltdown man. Perhaps you have heard of it? The Piltdown fossil
was a series of skull fragments discovered in the early 1900s that
encompassed a human-like skull, orangutan-like jaw, and chimpanzee
-like teeth. Scientists gave it the name Eoanthropus dawsoni.
A familiar degree of great excitement accompanied the discovery of
this fossil, as it purported to demonstrate a transition species between
man and “lower primates.” The great majority of the scientific community
jumped on this discovery as proof of evolution and the fossilized missing
links that even Charles Darwin was admittedly at a loss to explain.
Over 500 essays and scientific papers were written on the subject. Graduate
students produced their doctoral theses from studying the fragments.
There was only one problem: The fantastic find was a fake.
The perpetrator combined a 700-year-old human skull, a 500-year-old
lower jaw of a Sarawak orangutan and fossilized chimpanzee teeth.
He then used chemicals to dye the bones to give the appearance of age.
But here is the point. It took approximately 40 years for the scientific
community to discover the difference between a supposed multimillion
-year-old fossil and a modern chimpanzee.
For four decades, the majority of the scientific community accepted the
fossil as legitimate fact and proof that modern man was just part of
an evolutionary chain of species—despite the fact that several credible
scientists almost immediately disputed the validity of the find, that there
were visible file markings detectable on the teeth, and other incongruities.
Textbooks incorporated the discovery, thousands of students were taught
the faulty information, and untold millions were unsuspectingly influenced
into accepting the belief that people had evolved from monkeys.
All from a cobbled-together mess of human, orangutan and chimpanzee parts.
It was not just because of shoddy “scientific” testing applied to it that
the Piltdown hoax worked (although an unbiased and careful examination,
using the tools available at the time, would have revealed the hoax),
but because the fake fossil neatly satisfied the prevailing preconceived theory
of the time. Thus, supposedly unbiased truth-seeking scientists easily and even
willingly overlooked the aspects of the discovery that argued against its validity.
This is the pitfall that evolutionary enthusiasts repeatedly fall into.
Despite more than 150 years of searching for bones, the fossil record continues
to disprove the evolutionary theory. Not a single confirmed transition fossil
has been found! According to the evolutionary theory, there should be millions
and billions. Animals have been evolving into new species for hundreds of
millions of years, the theory goes. Therefore, scientists have reasonably
expected to find thousands of fossils, or at least hundreds, or maybe 10
transitionary species. But they can’t find a single one!
Scientists are not trying to honestly prove whether evolution holds true, as they
would any other theory. They are desperately, one-sidedly trying to verify evolution.
That is why the supposed Ida discovery (Darwinius masillae) is such a big deal.
“It’s part of our evolution that’s been hidden so far, it’s been hidden because
all the other specimens are so incomplete,” says Prof. Jorn Hurum, the scientist
who bought the fossil from a private collector who obtained it many years prior.
“They are so broken there’s almost nothing to study, and now this wonderful
fossil appears, and it makes the story so much easier to tell, so it’s really a
dream come true” (emphasis mine throughout).
“The significance of this new find is it has almost every single fragment
of bones,” confirms Tab Rasmussen, an anthropologist at Washington
University in St. Louis. “It’s very difficult to find anything besides teeth,
a jaw, and bones here and there. This is something that really vaults
the whole field forward.”
According to revealingthelink.com, the official website promoting Ida,
there is no primate fossil “so well preserved until we get to human burial.”
Revealing the Link - Welcome
Revealing the Link - The Implications - What Ida Tells Us
How condemning. The notion of evolution, accepted by the mainstream scientific
community as fact, is largely based on nothing more than a few eroded bone
fragments or scattered teeth—garbage evidence. And these are scientists;
individuals who supposedly reject anything but the hard, cold facts.
Evolution, it seems, is a theory based upon the evidence of things not seen.
But what about Ida? It is 95 percent complete, and even the contents of its last
dinner are visibly preserved in the fossil. Surely, all the hype must indicate
that it is good proof of evolution.
Unfortunately for evolutionists, as it turns out, Ida is a fraud too.
Professor Hurum and the professors at the University of Oslo purchased
the Ida fossil from a private collector who had purchased the fossil from
other black market dealers who had purchased it from amateur fossil
hunters in 1983. But even disregarding the atrocious second- and third-hand
chain of custody that would typically invalidate normal scientific procedure,
other evidence has come to light.
One of the co-authors who released the Ida study, Dr. Philip Gingerich,
recently admitted that the team would have preferred to publish in a
rigorous scientific journal, but had to settle for an open-source journal.
He told the Wall Street Journal, “There was a tv company involved and time
pressure. We’ve been pushed to finish the study. It’s not how I like to do science.”
And then, to even be allowed to publish their ideas in the less-rigorous,
free online Public Library of Science One journal, the scientists had to
virtually renounce their own claim that Ida was a human ancestor by
inserting the statement: “[The species] could represent a stem group
from which later anthropoid primates evolved [the line leading to humans],
but we are not advocating this here.”
Wow! So, outside of the History Channel (which spent a record amount to
purchase the Ida movie rights months ago), the book promotion, and the
high-profile Michael Bloomberg press conference, Ida as a “missing link”
isn’t even considered good science.
It rings “all sorts of warning bells” when a tv company is dictating the science,
notes Prof. Peter Brown, a paleoanthropologist at the University of New England.
He says the scientific study did not provide sufficient proof to consider Ida as
a human ancestor, or even a primate ancestor. “It’s nice it has fingernails,
something we have, as do most primates … but they’ve cherry-picked
particular character[istics], and they’ve been criticized [by other scientists]
for doing that.”
“It’s not a missing link, it’s not even a terribly close relative to monkeys,
apes and humans, which is the point they’re trying to make,” says Carnegie
Museum of Natural History curator of vertebrate paleontology Chris Beard.
“I would be absolutely dumbfounded if it turns out to be a potential ancestor to humans.”
Even the scientists—in fact, the majority of scientists according to Yale
University’s Chris Gilbert—don’t believe the Ida fossil is a missing link.
Amid Media Circus, Scientists Doubt 'Ida' Is Your Ancestor
A Multimillion-Dollar Monkey Fraud
So where does that leave us?
It leaves us with monkey bones. Very beautiful, very complete fossilized
monkey bones, but monkey bones nonetheless. Ida is nothing more than
an extinct species of lemur. It’s not the “astounding” “landmark discovery”
it was hailed to be.
But this episode does uncover a real discovery: Just how willing “scientists”
are to close their eyes to the scientific truth. ?
B
In human terms; what is written above is an outright lie by the author.
When have you seen a rabbit and turtle running side by side?
Wait I want a pool
-
turtle and rabbit running along side each other
turtle and rabbit running along side each other
turtle and rabbit running along side each other
When have you seen a rabbit and turtle running side by side?
Wait I want a pool
-
B
Well you don't have to go very far to see creation evolution, the human body a person is created evolves out of two things..
A tadpole looking creature that swims up stream to locate a egg shell that is full of liquid to fertilize though both carry a complete make up of genes from two other humans that will evolve into a person who may or may not look like the orginal two humans. This in its self is a evolution a tadpole living in a egg that evolves into a full blown human...
A tadpole looking creature that swims up stream to locate a egg shell that is full of liquid to fertilize though both carry a complete make up of genes from two other humans that will evolve into a person who may or may not look like the orginal two humans. This in its self is a evolution a tadpole living in a egg that evolves into a full blown human...
Someone ask a prominent scholar if he really believed that so many breeds of Dogs came from the Two that were aboard the Ark during the flood. He answer besides YES was
Well, Lets look at what you believe in? We come from protoplasm,,,, where did that come from,,,, the chemicals in the ocena mixed together and made the protoplasm and where did that come from,,,,,Back then it continuously rained down upon the Rocks in the area.....and where did they come from....A cosmic burb some millions of years ago.
Well, if looks like we came from a Rock.......So did the Dogs..
Toto ---we are not in Kansas anymore.......
Well, Lets look at what you believe in? We come from protoplasm,,,, where did that come from,,,, the chemicals in the ocena mixed together and made the protoplasm and where did that come from,,,,,Back then it continuously rained down upon the Rocks in the area.....and where did they come from....A cosmic burb some millions of years ago.
Well, if looks like we came from a Rock.......So did the Dogs..
Toto ---we are not in Kansas anymore.......
let me ask you something..... The BIG Bang goes with evolution like mustard and mayonnaise goes with a hamburger
If the Big Bang really happened,,,should not all the planets, suns, galaxies (everything) be spinning the the same direction.
So why is it that our scientist tell us even within our solar system, we have three planets spinning the exact opposite of earth.
They also tell us there are planets, stars(which are billions of miles away), galaxies that are also spinning the opposite of earth...
Humm........as one evolutionist observe,,,,"that does present a Problem"... OOPS
If the Big Bang really happened,,,should not all the planets, suns, galaxies (everything) be spinning the the same direction.
So why is it that our scientist tell us even within our solar system, we have three planets spinning the exact opposite of earth.
They also tell us there are planets, stars(which are billions of miles away), galaxies that are also spinning the opposite of earth...
Humm........as one evolutionist observe,,,,"that does present a Problem"... OOPS
that life comes only from life, and that each kind reproduces
only after its kind (Genesis 1:25).
-the old question: what came first, the chicken or the egg?
God made man to be able to breed, he did not give this to angeles.
that sperm came from the seed of man, not from evolution
where does a tadpole evolve or come from, from a non life form?
God—who is life and the fountain source of all life!
The theory of evolution provided the atheist an explanation
of a creation without a Creator
All the advances of medical and surgical science in the treatment
and prevention of germ diseases are based upon this great truth
of the law of biogenesis—that life can come only from preexisting life.
Now let me ask people candidly, do you honestly believe that any power
or force of less intelligence than your mind produced you?
-
“the works were finished from the foundation of the world”
only after its kind (Genesis 1:25).
-the old question: what came first, the chicken or the egg?
God made man to be able to breed, he did not give this to angeles.
that sperm came from the seed of man, not from evolution
where does a tadpole evolve or come from, from a non life form?
God—who is life and the fountain source of all life!
The theory of evolution provided the atheist an explanation
of a creation without a Creator
All the advances of medical and surgical science in the treatment
and prevention of germ diseases are based upon this great truth
of the law of biogenesis—that life can come only from preexisting life.
Now let me ask people candidly, do you honestly believe that any power
or force of less intelligence than your mind produced you?
-
“the works were finished from the foundation of the world”
B
There are two kinds of evolutionist the one who doesn't believe in God and the one who does. Darwins theory IMO is off some for He didn't know what people know today nor had the technology to do so.. IMO even after all that has been accomplished up to date, the human mind is still just a baby in a high chair playing with squeaky toys eating baby food...
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
Point number 10.
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense
Point number 10.